The "no gc" crowd

Andrei Alexandrescu SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org
Tue Oct 8 20:38:13 PDT 2013


On 10/8/13 4:22 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
> On Oct 8, 2013, at 3:38 PM, Walter Bright <newshound2 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/8/2013 3:02 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
>>> You may argue that profiling won't always catch accidental allocations due to
>>> test coverage. This is true, but then @nogc is only a partial fix to this
>>> anyway. It will catch GC allocations, but what about accidental calls to malloc,
>>> mmap, or maybe an accidental IO call due to some logging you forgot to remove.
>>> GC allocations are just one class of performance problems, there are many more
>>> and I hope we don't have to add attributes for them all.
>>
>> This, of course, is the other problem with @nogc. Having a forest of attributes on otherwise ordinary functions is awfully ugly.
>
> And we already have a forest of attributes on otherwise ordinary functions.

It's the cost of expressiveness. Exercising deduction wherever possible 
is the cure.

Andrei



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list